This working theme is based on the assumption that the meaning of an image is mainly determined by its use. The same image takes on different meanings whether it is published in a newspaper article or on a packaging item. The use of existing images and imagery in new communication contexts may have the consequence, intended or otherwise, of changing, renewing, neutralizing, subverting meanings previously assigned to those images. Since it’s commonplace to say we’re surrounded by images, nowadays there’s all the more reason to wonder what their real power might be. This overgrowth of images has made our responsabilities clear: what counts more than any hypothetical meaning they might have is how we decide to use them. Such choices entail consequences on both formal and, more often, ethical levels. A lot of this issue deals with photography: photos, with their apparent contiguity to the real world, seem like innocent, obvious objects (we have thousands on our computers and mobile phones) and, more than illustration or painting, they seem like today’s default type of image. But there is nothing more insidious than innocence.